How to get the best raw exposure, part 2

I shot with m43 for 5 years professionally and now sony FF for 3 years. i could post many (1000 of in studio portraits , but not to offend M43 users
i will keep the outcome to my self.
BTW i won a debate on this same subject years ago with the sony a7s3 and s2 when no one picked up the s3 was a 48meg sensor 😁

Sounds like you are not comparing pixel sizes. You are comparing sensor sizes.

BTW i won a debate on this same subject years ago with the sony a7s3 and s2 when no one picked up the s3 was a 48meg sensor 😁

I should have used the term “myth” instead of the sarcastic “conventional wisdom.”
It s very common to read the claim that larger sensors are better for low light. That is true only in certain conditions (possibility of longer exposures or non-equivalent apertures).

When using the same technology and comparing at the same output size, same sensor size, bigger pixels do not have an advantage. You can try it out on DPR studio scene.

Do I understand that you are writing about full well per sensor area and not full well per photo site?

Photo sites per sensor area would make no difference if only interested in sensor area?

But, crop sensor with more photo sites per area than full size sensor at the same pixel resolution would have more visible noise than full size sensor?

If only interested in sensor area, then larger sensor wins. I interested in noise per pixel, pixel size wins.

Look up sony a7s3 48meg sensor binned to 12 and the sony a7s2 straight 12 meg large pixel on DXOmark. the s2 blows the s3 away.

For less than the cost of popcorn you could always just go

www.photopills.com/articles/exposure-photography-guide

And be done with it near enough.

Danny.

I don’t care about noise per pixel. I care about noise at same print size.

Sorry, the "f" disappeared from my "If" and my proofreading also failed. :)

But, sometimes I want to produce an image 4500x3000 pixels and send it off to be printed. In this case, with low light, the pixels will appear less noisy if the sensor had larger pixels all else being equal.

I also remember when i compared a straight out of camera shot from my a7r2 and a 8 shot hi res shot 50 meg image from my em1mk2 again the a7r2 won easily.
also shooting extreme macro and stacking 70 images larger pixel again wins hands down. because your only stacking noise with smaller sensor and less pixel bleeding. again larger pixels stacked wins here as well.

That article contains nonsense. It says that ISO represents sensor sensitivity and explains how exposure triangle works.

Well you could probably get in touch with them and let them know.

Why did you recommend it?

I can recommend a lot more if you like. Problem is we would go back and forth like the rest of this thread and that's not going to happen. If you want to correct them, contact them and let them know. It's very easy to do.